Fader ND is killing my sharpness

vrooms tests look exactly like mine but I didn't take the time to post shots. Its not a bad copy.

I did play with 2 polas last night though just looking at a lamp shade and unfortunately I also saw serious degradation as the ND was mixed stronger on a 105mm. I found that odd.
By the way I have a circular pola ( B+W) next to the lens and an old Tiffen linear on the outside.

Will try 2 polas again this afternoon and post the results, but sorry no time for pictures - its quite time consuming.

Lenny
 
I have found my Fader ND on a 50mm 1.8 at 1.8 to look very similar to Vrooms stills. If I had the time I'd do a proper test, but this looks VERY, VERY similar to what I see. It really softened the image. When I look through the Fader ND from the lens side and move it around, the image "ripples", there is microscopic ridges or bubbles on the surface. Mine has "NATURE 67mm Fader ND (W) HL-Optics" on the side.
 
I have one and I think it softens the image. Noticed it using interviews (outdoor). I only use it for b-roll in bright sun. I don't think you really notice it on that.
 
I also see the same results as vroom when using the Fader ND. I just read through the whole thread and I'd like to add (or I guess reiterate) that the tests using wide to normal focal lengths are not so relevant to the issue because it has been stated many times by users and Mr. Leung himself as well that this problem is only applicable when using longer focal lengths.
 
I just got my regular ND 8 and i stacked it together with ND4 in front of my lens and i see 0 sharpness loss ,i just bumped ISO to 200 and im happy with result,im glad i didnt bought fader ND.
 
I just tried a tiffen linear polarizer stacked on a Helipan circular polarizer and looked at a chart carefully. Looked fine, maybe very slight degredation but perhaps none - way better than fader ND. The fader ND looked pretty bad.

So I'm thinking of getting an 86mm linear pola so it won't vignette and adding it to my circular.

Has anyone tested the Singh-Ray. It is more compact than 2 filters though pricey.

Lenny
 
Probably a lot less loss losses from using a quality adjustable ND type alone, than most people create by some of the popular custom user settings... Everyone seems to like bringing down contrast entirely for video shooting, so they can then bring it back in "post". I'm not criticizing, just one thought I had on how I'll likely change some of my settings when using an adjustable ND filter.

I'm still waiting for mine, I bought one over a month ago from B&H and it's been a nightmare trying to get it. One delay after another. But I'm looking forward to using it for video work on my 7d.
 
Lenilenapi said:
I just tried a tiffen linear polarizer stacked on a Helipan circular polarizer and looked at a chart carefully. Looked fine, maybe very slight degredation but perhaps none - way better than fader ND. The fader ND looked pretty bad.

So I'm thinking of getting an 86mm linear pola so it won't vignette and adding it to my circular.

Has anyone tested the Singh-Ray. It is more compact than 2 filters though pricey.

Lenny
Click to expand...

Thanks, Lenny. I'd love to hear from others who have tried using two filters or the Singh-Ray.
 
Thanks to you vroom for posting this originally. I might not have noticed until I was stabbed in the back on job.

I still love the idea of the Fader ND so I've decided to get the linear pola to add to my circular instead of getting a variety of ND's. Too much trouble to change ND's all the time. At least with a video camera you have 3 choices built in so generally if you are running around in daylight you acn adjust to shade or sun without screwing and unscrewing filters.


Lenny
 
ND8 alone softens image on 200mm lens ,problems start to appear at about 135-150 range ,with nd4 its not that bad.On regular 50mm's it doesnt degrade quality,Maybe because its 80-205 zoom ,i dont have 200mm telephoto prime so cant test it.
 
My big question now is what exactly is causing the degradation. Obviously my first instinct is that it's because the outer polarizer is friggin plastic. So I've got this great little rotating mount with at least one piece of crap filter in it. I'd like to see if there's any way to use it with better glass. Anyone ever remove the element from a ring filter before? :D
 
kidwoo,
That's a brilliant idea. I just unscrewed the retaining ring. Unfortunately I don't have an 82mm linear pola to place in there but I do have a circular one I'll try. I did place an 82mm glass UV in and it fit.
Next question is what is the quality of the bottom filter. That's probaby a pretty cheap pola as well. Who said that one was glass? Unfortunately if I replace both, then I might as well spend $300 on a Sing-Ray (if its better that is). Since I already have an 82mm circular its cheaper to just add an 86mm linear as a second filter and that will cover a wide lens as well. A little more cumbersome to carry around though.

Lenny
 
Lenilenapi said:
I just tried a tiffen linear polarizer stacked on a Helipan circular polarizer and looked at a chart carefully. Looked fine, maybe very slight degredation but perhaps none - way better than fader ND. The fader ND looked pretty bad.

So I'm thinking of getting an 86mm linear pola so it won't vignette and adding it to my circular.
Click to expand...
Thank you for vindicating the DIY solution. Really, I can't thank you enough.

Another advantage is that if you don't want to use the variable ND, just remove the top polarizer, and you still have a usable polarizer attached to the camera. Main disadvantages are increased bulk and decreased ease-of-use due to having an extra ring that rotates (which is still useful for adjusting polarization angle). Also, you don't get the handy ND scale (printed on the side of the ring) with DIY.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top